Interpreting Social Group Dynamics

To me this is just a reminder of just how touchy people can be about disagreements. And how hard it is to actually talk to people with which you disagree.

It's hard enough one on one. But, throw in a group that has been meeting together for some time, and it's even easier for that group to discuss among themselves what they see as problem areas, while while not being open with the person with which there is a disagreement.

I still don't think it's right. But, I do acknowledge that it is quite common.

The only question is if it's worth my while to continue to be involved on any level. That remains to be seen.

I was watching "Trough the Wormhole" one night and it showed how this actually developes in human beings very young. They had a little three year old and showed her two stuffed animals exactly alike, one liked a food she liked and the other one liked a food she did not like. They told her she could have one of the stuffed animals to keep, she picked the one that liked the same food she liked, even though both stuffed animals were identicle.

When you are with people that want you to like what they like or have the same opinions, and you resist, typically what happens is they do discuss this amongst themselves and push you away.

I learned this many times over shakesphere. I learned this when I built a new home in a brand new neighborhood and it was not as big as the others, and that I did not drive the kind of car "they" felt was acceptable. They did make me feel very unwelcome and I have to say that I was miserable living there and was so glad when I moved away. My house was pretty and did not really look out of place in that neighborhood either.

Some people talk or follow what they "think" is "good or right" and truth is they may talk the talk but really do "not" walk the walk.

I'll try again tonight. I plan an asking R? what he meant by some comments he made previously.

I do have some respect for S? and I hope to have a good conversation with him tonight. And N? may be there.

I'm struggling to define exactly what it is I want to get out of this group. I think I want some people with which to talk about topics like morality and whatnot, but I'd also like a modicum of respect. I do expect there to be some "give and take" and I know not everyone is perfect and that sometimes the conversation could get heated.

I lost interest in my other group (the one from my OP), because virtually all of them did have the new-atheist mindset that all religions past and present are bad, and that it's an "atheist vs religious" type world. I see that same mentality in some in this current group, but not all. So, maybe I'll hang on a while longer.

Not everyone in our group shares the same world-view, or even gets along all that well. Last week, N left early because G insulted her by continually interrupting her.

S is into aliens, and appears to believe that some deity or at least intelligence must be responsible for our existence, but he is definitely not a Christian. He sometimes gets into arguments w/ R and G because of their stance on atheism. R and S don't appear to get along at all, from what I've seen. N was also irritated with him, because he interrupted the group with some song he wanted us to hear on his phone.

I did attend and it was one of our better meetings. G wasn't there and we all discussed the question "If we outlawed all religion and bibles, what rules would we live by?

R and D harassed me in some ways, but I called them on it. I have to admit I may feel a little jealous of R because he does appear to have the respect of many others in the group. I still find him to be full of rhetoric and sophistry, and apparently some are impressed by such things.

N and I went to Denny's afterward and had a good talk, as has become our custom.

Next week we intend to discuss the question "How much effort should we use to change someone's mind?"

JH has started in again. I haven't seen him in person since the 4th of July when he attended our party, but he emailed me (and our Monday night group at large) today, in another attempt to get me to come and debate the same topic in front of a group. Completely ignoring the fact that I told him I wasn't interested.

Unfortunately, JH has let me know that he cannot stick to the issues. He uses ad-hominems and gets way too personal, as well as being manipulative. It's just not worth my while.

I've been thinking about this lately. And a lot of my issues with D and R (and others in my life) is when they approach me with an attitude of "we know you believe X and we think it's stupid for you to believe X" or even "we assume you must believe X because of reason Y".

Anyway, the point is that there are a lot of assumptions, and the way they are brought up, in public, they put me in a position where I feel defensive (understandably, I think). First of all, it may not be the case that I believe X, and secondly, what is their argument that X is wrong, in the first place.

Or sometimes, it's "yes I believe X" but not for their assumed reasons, and again, I'd like them to explain why it's bad or wrong to believe X in the first place. And most of the time, it's not even a fair one on one fight, but rather the impression is that they've been talking and decided this among themselves, but give no argument for why their reasoning is correct.

So, they're in the habit of telling me I believe something and letting me know they're not happy with this fact, instead of asking me what I believe and explaining what they believe and why, or where they think any disagreement might lie.

shakesphere, a lot of people do this, play this kind of game. They just need to prove themselves and be right, or find a way to support their need to stay convinced in whatever they "need to" believe in.

I'm afraid I have to agree. It's fairly common for groups to act this way.
I'm working on ways to respond that don't require me to get defensive. I hope to be able to ask them about what I did to "give them that impression".

I've been thinking about the issue I brought up yesterday, and I suspect another healthy way to deal with the issue, is to ask something like "it appears you disagree with X", or even "it appears you believe Y (in opposition to X), why is that? Is this what the group believes?"

I think about what N told you too shakesphere. You are still searching and thinking with an open mind, these others are more interested in whatever supports the conclusions they have come to feel are right. If they can't get you to convert to their way of thinking then they will distance from you. Yes, groups can be this way unfortunately.

Another friend suggested that to ask why questions is confrontational. Hmm.

I think what is important is to ask yourself what "you" want out of this group experience.

I have been thinking about these kind of challenges myself shakesphere. I have come to recognize that human beings are like computers, many of them are programed a certain way and will respond the same way everytime you interact with them.

In a sad way, I am really seeing just how much this is true because of my mother's dementia and how her mind basically runs a loop of thought patterns while she struggles with her short term memory. I can interact with that old loop that includes my special relationship with her. I have shared things I have learned and that old loop will say, "that is important, yes, I had not thought of it that way, thank you for telling me that", yet what is sad is that the chances of her not remembering that good conversation is very high if not almost certain.

This R that tends to bother you has a loop of how he interacts with others that you will most likely never change about him. In a way N was trying to tell you that too remember? There are people shakesphere that can only see "you" the way they have learned how to "see" others and it isn't about "you" but moreso about them.

I actually had a conversation last night with someone close that I care about that is being treated badly by someone, disrespectfully bad even though the person I am talking to is very nice, responsible and has helped this other person a great deal.
I told this person that it really is important to realize that how she is being treated is really due to a charector defect in this other individual and how this other person was disrespected and while this person does have some things she knows that are important, in the scheme of things she is not really respected in the field overall.

There is a very successful horse trainer that is older and he competed in the Olympics and has quite a resume of accomplishments and knowledge to him. He can make money on that soap box now, which is what a lot of individuals who managed to be successful in their ventures can do. Actually, that is something Clinton has done too.
Well, his message to students is "I TAKE" and in his lessons that are typically audited by several other trainers and parents, he points to the audience and says "I TAKE FROM YOU AND YOU AND YOU". Now, he is not saying "I USE" when he is saying that, instead he is saying that whenever he sees something he likes that is fruitful to him in someway, he "TAKES" and adds to his own way of doing things as well as improving his skills.

Well, that is really how to look at other people shakesphere, each and every person has something you can "TAKE" from. It is much like looking through their basket of apples where some are just plain rotten, but if you push those aside you may find one or two ripe ones that you can take out of that basket and just forget about whatever is there that is just "rotten apples and useless to you". Keep in mind though, it is not about being a "user" with people, instead it is learning how to interact with them in a way so you can sort through their apples to find some "food for thought and skills that may be helpful to you".

There is usually "something" there. However, some people do have a lot of rotten apples, it's just what they happen to have and they are just not worth agruing with simply because they are just going to keep handing you whatever happens to be "rotten" an no good for you. If the other person doesn't have an open mind and likes to look for "interesting fruit" with you, then that is just how they are and just not worth trying to "change" them or even "do battle with them".

Thanks for those thought Open Eyes.
Yes, I'm trying to change the way I see my world and react to others. I like the idea of "taking" which I interpret to mean, take away something useful from my encounters with people, any people.

Another friend, the one who I suggested I get "Socratic" on the group by asking them questions, also mentioned his interest in non-violent communication.

My views of the group are changing, in that I hope to attend and not have to convert anyone, or be converted myself. And I do take comfort in that there is N, and S, and a few who appear to be better friend material than R and D.

Right now, it is wearing to go to the group, in that I don't like my ideas being misrepresented, and I find I must be on my toes in order to prevent that from happening. But even that might be more my issue, and there may be a different way to view that problem.

Anyway, I won't be able to attend tonight, and I'm looking forward to the break.

"Right now, it is wearing to go to the group, in that I don't like my ideas being misrepresented, and I find I must be on my toes in order to prevent that from happening. But even that might be more my issue, and there may be a different way to view that problem. " quote shakesphere

I have had to work on this challenge myself shakesphere so I understand what you are saying. I found that "my issue" is that when I do come across certain types of individuals that respond to me with mostly criticisms it does bother me and I do feel the same way where I am constantly stuck defending myself. It has happened to me in an extremely profound way though so I am way more sensitive then I used to be. Well, I have PTSD, so that alone magnifies these toxic scenarios where they can literally blast me away. Truth is, it's very intrusive and I can't help but pay attention to it which is something that others simply do not understand, especially the individuals that keep handing me their "bad apples", they hurt when they hit and they are certainly don't provide me with any nutrition at all which is one thing I definitely could use right now.
I feel like I have lost my shield and I am trying very hard to fashion a new one all over again.

However, shakesphere, a person does work on their shield all their lives pretty much. That is where the ability to understand "taking" comes into play. When you talk about this group you are actually identifying the individuals that you have been able to do some "taking" from. And, as you continue to interact, you may learn how to contribute and take without being a threat to the group, because the individuals they have interacted with that were not able to contribute did not last. That is typical with any group, any group at all too.

I can say that I have definitely learned on my own life path that some groups are just way too toxic to be around too. I have really learned that in the competitive horse show world. I prefered to stay away from show barns that focused on a "star rider/ trainer's favorite" type group, it was much better to be with groups that focused on the group of riders supporting each other instead. Actually, that provided my daughter with some very helpful "take aways" that has helped her tremendously in her career too because she learned how to be a "contributor" rather then always being on the defensive all the time.

I noticed in your other thread you are looking at each individual and their personal challenges. That is good, it's good that you are looking behind them that way because when you do that it can help you see the whole charector in them which ofcourse includes their story because unless you do that often you may miss what you can "take" away from that that can mean something important to you. It's not much different then reading a book and learning something from it but when you do that you have to take the time to sit and read it right? With people it's "listening" and finding a way to encouage them to keep telling you their story.

You know, that individual R I think that seems to need to be the center of attention? Well, I bet no one ever just sat with him and listened to "his" story because I am sure he has one. Well, that is when you get a better idea of "why" he settles down with "his opinions" about things and fights you when you challenge him.

Do you remember that book I told you about that I got for my father to read about Okinawa? Well, I met the author who wrote that book and he talked about what I just told you. He has written a lot of books and has quite a following of readers who love how he writes. My father told me that out of all the books he has read he liked the way this writer wrote the best. (I know, I still have to find the book so I can give you the exact name of it etc.) He talked about how he had to develop a way to talk to people, and it was especially difficult when it came to talking to not only veterans from the American side but the other side too.

It reminds me of a story I heard a really long time ago about an individual who thought his life was much too hard. He was told to throw his cross of burdens on the table where other crosses were thrown and he could then choose whatever cross he wanted instead. So, he decided to pick the smallest cross of all and it turned out that was "his" cross that he chose from all the crosses on that table.

R doesn't do anything quite so obvious. He's not loud our obnoxious. He's more insidious in that there are no clearly defined issues, but rather I am questioned in public in a way to make it apparent that my views are viewed with suspicion, while his are above reproach, with no explanation of why this is the case.

I'm frequently put into a position where I must explain myself, but he does not hold himself to the same standards, in that he doesn't explain his own position, or why it is "better", despite the fact, that is exactly what he is suggesting with his comments and questions.

He is insidious because he wants to be or considers himself the authority figure. If you step back and look at the group as a whole, it seems to me that all of them are challenged and he is the one that defends the ideology they interact under. He will put you on the defensive every time you question that.

In a way he is the rock that everyone bounces their balls off of, and if he softens then that game can't be played. He says, "I am their rock so you are not allowed to question that, you instead have to fall into the group somewhere or else you will not be part of the group."

What would be interesting is to see his part in helping the others with their problems/challenges. He probably doesn't, he is most likely just the gate keeper.
Is he the preacher in the group? (even no religion can be run like a religion).

No, he's not the preacher. But, he does make rather silly assumptions, as far as I'm concerned. One assumption is that his version of the world is beyond reproach, and if it were not so, then we (or maybe just I) would be able to explain why that is, and change his mind.

It's difficult to keep from being drawn in to his way of thinking. His way of thinking is that I'm in an inferior position, and I must convince him. In reality, neither of us has a corner on the truth. There is room for give and take.

Unfortunately, there are some people that will choose to interact in a way that tries to make the other person look or feel inferior. It is often just selfishness and that individual's need to have a sense of being somehow superior. However, that doesn't really mean that individual "is" or even deserves to be "superior". That kind of person is used to getting their way by either intimidation or just not being open hense that encourages their competition to give up or fall into place "under his control". What I don't like about that is that it chases away "contributors" which doesn't end up being very productive in a lot of situations.

On a whim I went back to the first group I mentioned in this thread. I get along pretty well with one of the members, DS, and we stay in touch. We went to another meeting together, and then went to their group.

It's just not a good fit. I tend to be more accepting and they tend to be anti-.
I like (and want to be like) Neil DeGrasse Tyson, they tend to like (and want to be like) Matt Dillahunty.

Although I wonder if some of the others who aren't so vocal might be worth approaching. Something to consider. I did have a pretty good conversation with someone (BF) I haven't mentioned before. BF doesn't seem to care all that much about what the others think.

Went to my regular Monday night group. R and D were not in attendance, and I enjoyed the reprieve. My views of K are changing. I'm noticing her sarcasm.
Had a good time talking with N afterward.

All in all, a pretty good meeting. People are people, they have both good and bad qualities.